967 Matching Annotations
  1. Aug 2018
    1. Plotline 3: Making life sensible is as much about who we are as about narrating events and experiences

      Later in this section, Cunliffe and Coupland write:

      "In summary, ‘making life sensible’ is a complex interweaving of self-other, of retrospective and prospective, discursive and embodied, routine and creative, explicit and intuitive sensemaking."

      The narrating process is a "a complex interweaving of self-other, of retrospective and prospective, discursive and embodied, routine and creative, explicit and intuitive sensemaking."

      Identity construction (who am I?, who are you?, who do I want to be in the future?) is an important factor here as the foundation by which socially constructed sensemaking is generated and justifications (narrative rationality) are staked out.

      It's also incredibly messy, social, and contradictory -- all simultaneously.

    2. Plotline 2: Making our life sensible enough to go on is an embodied process

      The embodied process involves how we our bodies (everything except cognitive function) to make sense of our surroundings/situations. This embodied process includes emotions, physical self, language, gestures, actions, and lived experiences.

    3. Plotline 1: Making life sensible occurs in polyphonic, responsive and ongoing moments of embodied narrative performance

      Polyphonic is described as multiple voices and multiple interpretations of the story element which, in turn, can produce competing narratives. There is also a subtle temporal nature to "making life sensible" as people attempt to apply narrative logic in the moment, to use retrospection to make sense of past events or to peer into the future.

      Uses a more emotional, experiential, and embodied perspective for sensemaking through narrative is counter to the org studies POV that sensemaking is frequently a "deliberate, collaborative and unemotional process"

    4. Indeed, we use the term ‘sensible’ deliberately to differentiate our approach from more cognitive schematic approaches to sensemaking. The Latin root of sensible is sensibilis, to do with the senses – being sensitive to and showing good sense in practical living circumstances.

      The authors differentiate between sensemaking in the cognitive sense and sensible in the experiential sense.

    5. We offer an alternative to sensemaking as a representational, cognitive, information-processing, or communicative process, and contest the idea that sensemaking is a purely retrospective and linear activity. We build on narrative theory to propose that sensemaking is a temporal process of making our life and ourselves sensible through embedded and embodied narrative performances. It is an interpretive process in which we judge our expe-rience, actions and sense of identity in relationship to specific and generalized others.

      Cunliffe and Coupland's framework that contests Weick's perspective on sensemaking and proposes a new interpretative process that is temporal, embodied and performative.

      See: Goffman (1978) The presentation of self in everyday life

    6. Narrative rationality is therefore fundamental to narrative sensemaking, because it connect us with our social surroundings through an ongoing process of interpreting, assessing and critiquing our experience: a form of ‘criti-cal self-awareness’ (Fisher, 1985: 349)

      While there are different theories to describe how narratives are constructed in organizations, Cunliffe and Coupland argue that "... narratives are the means by which we organize and make sense of our experience and evaluate our actions and intentions."

      Narrative rationality takes sensemaking a step further and theorizes how people judge the merits of a narrative from discordant story elements.

      Cunliffe and Coupland mention that people use probability, fidelity, plausibility, reliability, trustworthiness and wisdom of the constructed narrative and the narrator as ways to judge its rationality.

    7. Although Weick sees interpretation as a key element in creating such stories, he defines it as ‘the process by which managers translate data into knowledge and understanding about the environment’ (2001: 251), i.e. a cognitive infor-mation-processing activity. Our article offers an alternative perspective by focusing on the interpretive and embodied nature of sensemaking within the flow of experience.

      Contrast of Weick's view of storytelling as cognitive vs Cunliffe and Coupland's perspective as experiential.

    8. More specifically it is the process by which we label, categorize and create plausible stories that retrospectively ‘rationalize what peo-ple are doing’ (Weick et al., 2005)

      Shorter Weick sensemaking description

    9. Weick’s formative work is based on the claim that sensemaking is the means by which we enact (make ‘real’) our environments: a process of social construction and committed interpretation that ‘introduces stability into an equivocal flow of events by means of justi-fications that increase social order’ (2001: 15).

      Cunliffe and Coupland's interpretation of Weick's sensemaking theory

    10. Our theorization of embodied sensemaking differs from, and extends, current work in three main ways. First, we define embodiment more broadly than emotion – as bodily sensations, felt experiences, emotions and sen-sory knowing; second, we situate embodiment in lived experience not as abstracted from, and able to be generalized across, experience; and third, we argue that embodiment is an integral part of sensemaking.

      Description of embodied narrative sensemaking. Cunliffe and Coupland refer to these as plotlines:

      "Plotline 1: Making life sensible occurs in polyphonic, responsive and ongoing moments of embodied narrative performance"

      "Plotline 2: Making our life sensible enough to go on is an embodied process"

      "Plotline 3: Making life sensible is as much about who we are as about narrating events and experiences"

    11. Ricoeur (e.g. 1988) because he sees narrative theory as a form of making sense in and across time that involves personal and community identit

      Ricoeur claims there are temporal elements to sensemaking

      Get this paper

    12. Merleau-Ponty (2004 [1962], 2004 [1948]) because of his theorization of the relationship between perception and embodi-ment.

      Unsure about whether Merleau-Ponty's work also includes a temporal element. Get the paper.

    13. Specifically, we argue that making life sensible:• occurs in embedded narrative performances – in the lived experience of everyday, ordinary interactions and conversations with others and ourselves;• is temporal, taking place moment-to-moment within and across time and space;• encompasses polyphony as we attempt to interweave multiple, alternative and contested narratives and stories;• is an ongoing embodied process of interpretation of self and experience in which we cannot separate ourselves, our senses, our body and emotions

      Four features of everyday sensemaking:

      • lived experience

      • temporal

      • polyphonic

      • embodied

    14. Our contribution lies in extending the work on sensemaking theory to include the notion of embodied narrative sensemaking, which posits that whether we are aware of it or not, we make our lives and ourselves ‘sensible’ through embodied (bodily) interpreta-tions in our ongoing everyday interactions.

      Extension of sensemaking theory

    15. A gap therefore exists in terms of theorizing sensemaking as a lived embodied everyday experience

      Cunliffe and Coupland claim a research gap

    1. Leaming viewed as situated activity has as its central defining characteristic a process that we call legitimate peripheral par­ticipation. By this we mean to draw attention to the point that learners inevitably participate in communities of practitioners and that the mastery of knowledge and skill requires newcom­ers to move toward full participation in the sociocultural practices of a community.

      LPP definition

      The phrase "situated learning" is contested (see pp. 31-35). Lave and Wenger use this definition:

      "In our view, learning is not merely situated in practice — as if it were some independently reifiable process that just happened to be located somewhere; learning is an integral part of generative social practice in the lived-in world. The problem — and the central preoccupation of this monograph — is to translate this into a specific analytic approach to learning. Legitimate peripheral participation is proposed as a descriptor of engagement in social practice that entails learning as an integral constituent."

      At the end of the chapter, Lave and Wenger offer this description:

      "In conclusion, we emphasize the significance of shifting the analytic focus from the individual as learner to learning as participation in the social world, and from the concept of cognitive processes to the more-encompassing view of social practice."

    2. There are central issues that are only touched upon in this monograph, and that need to be given more attention. The concept of "community of practice" is left largely as an intuitive notion, which serves a purpose here but which requires a more rigorous treatment. In particular, unequal relations of power must be included more systematically in our analysis. Hegemony over resources for learning and alienation from full participation are inherent in the shaping of the legitimacy and peripherality of participation in its historical realizations. It would be useful to understand better how these relations generate characteristically intersti­tial communities of practice and truncate possibilities for iden­tities of mastery.

      Lave and Wenger list a few limitations about LPP. Notably, for my study, the lack of definition around what is a "community of practice."

    3. In this sense, peripherality, when it is enabled, suggests an opening, a way of gaining access to sources for understanding through growing involve­ment. The ambiguity inherent in peripheral participation must t�en _be connected to issues of legitimacy, of the social orga­mzat10n of and control over resources, if it is to gain its full analytical potential.

      Not sure I understand this entirely.

      Are Lave and Wenger arguing that for LPP to be fully engaged as a learning theory, the organization's legitimacy must be fully on board.

    4. Furthermore, legitimate peripherality is a complex notion, imRlicated in social structures involving rel�tions _of pow�r •.

      Important to recognize that there are power dynamics in LPP within all 3 dynamics -- belonging, involvement, and relationship.

      As noted later in this passage:

      "In this sense, it can itself be a source of power or powerlessness, in affording or preventing articulation and interchange among communities of practice. The ambiguous potentialities of legitimate peripherality reflect the concept's pivotal role in providing access to a nexus of relations otherwise not perceived as connected."

    5. But we intend for the concept to be taken as a whole. Each of its aspects is indispensable in defining the others and cannot be considered in isolation. Its constituents contribute inseparable aspects whose combinations create a landscape _ shapes, degrees, textures -of community membership.

      LPP is constituted by each of its dimensions:

      legitimate: belonging to a community of practice

      peripheral: multiple ways to be involved in the community, that can/should change as learning is acquired

      participation: the degree of relationship in community membership, which also can/should change as learning is acquired

    6. In our view, earning is not merely situated in practice -as if it were some independently reifiable process that just happened to be located somewhere; learning is ao integral part of generative social practice in the lived-in world.

      Lave and Wenger's definition of LPP.

      "Legitimate pe­ripheral participation is proposed as a descriptor of engage­ment in social practice that entails learning as an integral con­stituent." (p. 35)

    7. The no­tion of situated learning now appears to be a transitory con-cept, a bridge, between a view according to w�ich cognit'.ve processes (and thus learning) are primary and a v�ew according to which social practice is the primary, generative p�eno�e­non and learning is one of its characteristics.

      Situated learning as a bridge beyond repetitive practice but learning as an actual social phenomenon.

    8. The gen­erality of any form of knowledge always lies i� the powe� to renegotiate the meaning of the past and future m constructing the meaning of present circumstances.

      In a longer passage not clipped here, Lave and Wenger argue that knowledge is situated by context and circumstance -- not all knowledge is generalizable.

      They also raise the point that knowledge also has a temporal component.

    9. Second, this conception of situated learning clearly was more �nc�m�assi�� in i�tent than �onventional notions of '' learning in suu or learnmg by domg" for which it was used as a rough equivalent.

      "Second, this conception of situated learning clearly was more encompassing in intent than conventional notions of 'learning in situ' or 'learning by doing' for which it was used a rough equivalent."

      LPP came about because the definitions of situated learning were inadequate to describe how people learn while engaged in a social practice.

    10. "Legitimate peripheral participation" provides a way to speak about the relations between newcom­ers and old-timers, and about activities, identities, artifacts, and communities of knowledge and practice. It concerns the process by which newcomers become part of a community of practice. A person's intentions to learn are engaged and the meaning of learning is configured through the process of be­coming a full participant in a sociocultural practice. This so­cial process includes, indeed it subsumes, the learning of knowledgeable skills.

      This is an apt description for how SBTF volunteers are onboarded and learn how to contribute to a crowdsourcing process.

    1. They are concerned with organization theory, with explanations that ‘separate processes of organizing from the sites where they take place’ (Czarniawska, 2010: 156). To talk about abduction as cue + frame + connection, or about improvisation as variation + selection + retention, or about recurrent action patterns (Cohen, 2009) as routines, or about dominant frames of reference, is to reach for a more sweeping grasp of social order.

      Czarniawska's observation that "separate processes of organizing from the sites where they take place" could be a helpful frame for talking about the digital humanitarian/social coordination work process that sits outside of the social media platforms where the data is derived.

    2. Humphreys, Ucbasaran and Lockett attend to recurring stories told by jazz musicians, with the joint lenses of sensemaking and sensegiving, for purposes of articulating the order that makes improvisation possible.

      How is sensegiving defined here?

      Does the social coordination process involve both sensemaking and sensegiving?

      Does the social media UGC and collection process involve both sensemaking and sensegiving?

    3. As a final comment to follow-up on the template for linking that Cunliffe and Coupland provide, while they keep three processes in motion, it is unlikely that all three stabilize at the same time. It is plausible that the first of the three to stabilize then acts as a frame within which the other two unfold. Thus, while there may be a dominant story that shapes organizing and sensemaking, there may be dominant sensemaking or dominant organizing that constrain the other two. It is all a matter of sequences of stabilization.

      Temporal influence on the sequence of organizing, storytelling and sensemaking.

      What comes first, as Weick argues it is unlikely each dimension stabilizes (becomes clear) simultaneously?

    4. The haunting question is how do I fit into the story.

      Need to read the football club paper to understand this context but is it referring to situating oneself in the story?

      Read the Nâslund and Pemer paper to see how they are using the term "semantic fit".

    5. A cue, by itself, with-out a frame, has no predicate. Once you put it in a frame, it does. A further linkage is that the emphasis in abduction on supposition ties it to antenarrative conceived as a bet or speculation akin to a presumption of logic that needs to be worked out.

      Weick argues that sensemaking is ultimately an iterative inductive "process of connecting cues to interpretations back to cues ..."

      Connecting a cue to frame through abduction is a linking process that helps to knit together the 7 aspects of sensemaking.

      See: https://www.utwente.nl/en/bms/communication-theories/sorted-by-cluster/Organizational%20Communication/Sensemaking/

    6. The difference between contested and uncontested polyphony may link to antenarratives. Boje (2001: 2) argues that when people translate stories into narratives they ‘impose counterfeit coherence and order on otherwise fragments and multi-layered experiences of desire.’ Counterfeit coherence is unstable, subject to detection and breaching, all of which link the degree of contestation to sensemaking, organizing, and transitions between stories and narratives

      Weick writes before this passage:

      "When Cunliffe and Coupland incorporate polyphony into their first plotline, they make it more meaningful to examine contested stories."

      Need to read the paper to get a better sense of how they're defining contested -- but if it references a situation where the antenarrative information is confusing, complex, contradictory then this concept will be a good fit for the SBTF study.

    7. Cunliffe and Coupland call attention to polyphony. That one word is rich in connota-tions for them. It suggests contestation, making meaning with others, the overlap of sensemaking and sensegiving, and the emotionality of sensemaking

      Cunliffe and Coupland's definition of polyphony.

      This is important for framing the crowdsourcing and social media aspects of DHN work and the complexity of the sensemaking process.

    8. Sense and organizing emerge when a story begins to come together, identities begin to make sense, identities and actions can be given a sense of narrative rationality and we can connect plot and character. (p. 81)This is my favorite one sentence effort to provide a template for further development of linkages. The sentence is noteworthy because it includes sense, organizing, story, identities, actions, making sense, giving sense, narrative rationality, plot, and character. All of these elements are portrayed in the context of beginnings and emergings, which conveys a sense of ongoing forming and dissolving

      Weick's preferred description of sensemaking by Cunliffe and Coupland.

    9. Maclean et al. point to an intriguing tension in sensemaking. The tension is generated by the question, is sensemaking episodic or continuous?

      A quasi-temporal aspect of sensemaking. Good to know but I don't think at this point that it is a factor for the current study.

    10. In the lan-guage of Heidegger, sensemaking is triggered when the availableness of ready-to-hand coping is interrupted and attention shifts to unready-to-hand occurentness. The inter-rupted project still provides a frame and restoration occurs within that frame. An impor-tant linkage resides in the fact that environments vary significantly in the frequency of unexpected events.

      Weick continues the point that certain environments have so many interruptions and anomalies that the sensemaking process feels continuous even though it is really a series of distinct episodes of sensemaking through multiple breaches and restorations.

    11. Jeong and Brower (2008: 225) propose that practitioner sensemaking develops through the three stages of noticing, interpretation, and action, which vary as a function of the ecological, institutional, and social relational contexts in which they are constructed.

      Jeong and Brower's definition of sensemaking

      Seems to be more of an extension of Dewey's framework on attention.

    12. Starbuck and Milliken (1988) assert that ‘sensemaking refers to “comprehending, understanding, explaining, attributing, extrapolating and predicting.”

      Starbuck and Milliken's defintion of sensemaking

      This is quite broad.

    13. Maclean et al. also demonstrate clearly how sensemaking can be defined by its stages. The movement through time of different forms of interpretive work is captured in their phrase ‘language that constructs and gives order to reality, which it (temporarily) sta-bilizes’ (p. 20). They suggest that this movement consists of locating, meaning-making, and becoming.

      Maclean et al's definition of sensemaking

      The idea of temporal stages and spatial movement that includes locating could also be a way to describe the situating behavior.

      So far, this is the only definition that seems to include a temporal-spatial component

    14. Later in their article, Cunliffe and Coupland effectively summarize sensemaking as embodied efforts to figure out what to do and who we are. That is a tidy framework for interpreting the life stories of elite bankers since they are essentially figuring out what they did and who they were, with heavy editing, to point up the legitimacy of the what and who that are retrieved.

      Another Cunliffe and Coupland definition of sensemaking

      Could "embodied efforts to figure out what to do and who we are" touch on what I'm calling situated time? Need to read the paper to see how they refer to the term embodied.

    15. Gephart et al. define sensemaking as ‘an ongoing process that creates an intersubjective sense of shared meanings through conversation and non-verbal behavior in face to face settings where people seek to/produce, negotiate, and maintain a shared sense of meaning’ (2010: 284–285).

      Gephart's definition of sensemaking

      Could "shared meaning" be driving the need for SBTF volunteers to situate themselves in time in order to co-construct a story?

    16. Cunliffe and Coupland treat sensemaking as ‘collaborative activity used to create, legitimate and sustain organiza-tional practices or leadership roles’ (p. 65). If we add the phrase ‘and individual’ to the word ‘collaborative’ in that definition then we have a rendition of sensemaking that works for the Maclean et al. article, right down to the focus on legitimacy and leadership.

      Cunliffe and Coupland's definition of sensemaking

      This seems less relevant to the SBTF volunteers' situating behavior.

    17. Whittle and Mueller also anticipate and inform the nature of reconstructing a life story when they depict sensemaking as ‘a broader term [than stories] that refers to the process through which people interpret themselves and the world around them through the pro-duction of meaning’ (p. 114). It is their focus on ‘meaning’ and their inclusion of both the person and ‘the world around them’ that fits Maclean

      Whittle and Mueller's definition of sensemaking

      Could "process through which people interpret themselves and the world around them through the production of meaning" be driving the need for SBTF volunteers to situate themselves in time in order to co-construct a story?

    18. To talk about antenarrative as a bet is also to invoke an important structure in sense-making; namely, the presumption of logic (Meyer, 1956)

      the presumption of logic manifests in the 7th aspect of sensemaking: plausibility?

      identity construction / retrospection / enactment / social construction / ongoing / extracted cues / plausibility

      "Antenarratives set up a similar dynamic. The transition from story to narrative is fostered by the belief that the fragments will have made sense although at the moment that is little more than a promise." <-- that is the logic, that at some points the disparate facts will come together and make sense/

    19. People are often thrown into pre-existing, organized action patterns. They experience the middle of a narrative but only the vaguest beginnings or ends. Without those boundaries people dwell in antenarrative. But that is where sense-making, organizing, and discursive devices make a difference. ‘People who are thrown establish their own temporality’ (Hernes and Maitlis, 2010: 31)

      This is the sociotemporal hook for the SBTF study.

      Read the Hernes and Maitlis paper

      "People who are thrown establish their own temporality" << what does this mean?

    20. ‘Antenarrative is the fragmented, non-linear, incoherent, collective, unplotted and pre-narrative speculation, a bet’ (Boje, 2001: 1). Organizing, in the context of antenarrative, is a bet that these fragments will have become orderly and that efforts to impose temporality

      This is the sociotemporal hook for the SBTF study.

      Antenarrative definition from Boje (2001).

      See: Dawson and Sykes (2018) https://via.hypothes.is/http://wendynorris.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/Dawson-and-Sykes-2018-Concepts-of-Time-and-Temporality-in-the-Storytelling-and-Sensemaking-Literatures-A-Review-and-Critique.pdf

      This runs counter to the more frequent linear time structure of narratives.

      The wikipedia article makes a bit more sense:

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antenarrative

      "Antenarratives serve a similar purpose. The process of moving from the nebulous and chaotic story to a narrative with a beginning middle and end is the antenarrative faith that story fragments will make retrospective sense some time in the future."

      More info on antenarrative here:

      "The antenarrative is pre-narrative, a bet that a fragmented polyphonic story will make retrospective, narrative, sense in the future. In a recent description of the bet aspect of antenarrative Karl Weick has said "To talk about antenarrative as a bet is also to invoke an important structure in sense-making; namely, the presumption of logic (Meyer, 1956)."

      https://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/antenarrative

    21. Whittle and Mueller describe how, in crises, people are ‘called upon to justify or excuse their own role (or lack thereof)’ (p. 133) using story-lines built from discursive devices. Justifications are crucial anchors in organizing as they bind people to actions that are consistent with them. And such actions tend to recur, stabilize, and serve as resources for dominant stories.

      Description of how storytelling is generated during crisis and how it connects to enactments that is a part of sensemaking.

      Read this paper.

    22. Justification, understood as discourse that introduces legitimacy and stability into social action, is a source of linkage that recurs in several articles. Cunliffe and Coupland, for example, argue that we create sense ‘if we can find justifications (narrative rationality) for our and others’ actions’ (p. 69)

      Justification definition.

      Justification is used as a linkage in storytelling to connect the what/with/for elements.

      See: Cunliffe and Coupland http://wendynorris.com/cunliffe-and-coupland-2011-from-hero-to-villain-to-hero-making-experience-sensible-through-embodied-narrative-sensemaking/

    23. Brown’s (2004) summary description of dominant stories: a hegemonic story may be able to fix the meaning of the concepts and labels available to narrate events in the organization, and thereby circumscribe sensemaking

      Dominant story definition.

      Described the way some stories persist because they link/associate the what/with/for concepts that makes sense. The dominant story is not the only way to link these attention concepts (see Dewey) but they become normalized due to people's need/desire to satisfice.

    24. When I say ‘see more clearly’ I have in mind John Dewey’s (1902) threefold question for examining attention. Dewey argues that we need to examine to what attention is being paid, with what, and for what.

      Weick argues here that Dewey's approach to "examining attention" is needed to "see more clearly":

      "to what" >> attention is paid

      "for what" >> purpose of the attention

      "with what" >> method for paying attention

      Weick appears to use this approach to focus on the links needed to compile a story into sensemaking

    25. sensemaking

      Sensemaking is an approach to thinking about and implementing communication research and practice and the design of communication-based systems and activities. It consists of a set of philosophical assumptions, substantive propositions, methodological framings and methods.

      According to Weick, sensemaking consists of seven aspects:

      https://www.utwente.nl/en/bms/communication-theories/sorted-by-cluster/Organizational%20Communication/Sensemaking/

    1. ‘Antenarrative is the fragmented,non-linear, incoherent, collective, unplotted, and pre-narrative speculation, a bet. To traditional narrativemethods antenarrative is an improper storytelling awager that a proper narrative can be constituted’(Boje 2001, p. 1).

      Antenarrative definition.

      This runs counter to the more frequent linear time structure of narratives.

      The wikipedia article makes a bit more sense:

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antenarrative

      "Antenarratives serve a similar purpose. The process of moving from the nebulous and chaotic story to a narrative with a beginning middle and end is the antenarrative faith that story fragments will make retrospective sense some time in the future."

      More info on antenarrative here:

      "The antenarrative is pre-narrative, a bet that a fragmented polyphonic story will make retrospective, narrative, sense in the future. In a recent description of the bet aspect of antenarrative Karl Weick has said "To talk about antenarrative as a bet is also to invoke an important structure in sense-making; namely, the presumption of logic (Meyer, 1956)."

      https://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/antenarrative

    2. Sixth, investi-gating the use of temporal modalities in making andgiving sense in the storytelling of management andother occupational groups, for example, in processesof story-weaving in the assembly of smaller storiesthat variously draw from the past, present and future(see Maitlis 2005, p. 45; Reissner and Pagan 2013,pp. 52, 83)

      Future research direction: ??

      Look at the citations

    3. Fifth, the importance of shifting contextualconditions over chronological time in the rewritingof histories and the reconstruction of narratives thatreposition individuals and groups, in, for example,a movement from hero to villain (see Cunliffe andCoupland 2012; Godfreyet al. 2016).

      Future research direction: ??

      Read the Cunliffe and Coupland paper

    4. Fourth, the com-pression and expansion of time structures in storiesthat compete, and the different techniques for draw-ing on temporal modalities for sensemaking in theconstruction of compelling power-political narrativesthat seek to influence the sense giving of others (seeBuchanan and Dawson 2007; Dawson and Buchanan2012)

      Future research direction: Timescapes // Time compression // Post-Colonial and Feminist Time

      See: Adam 1990 and 2004 See: Giddens' structuration theory

    5. Third, the use of time and temporality for mak-ing and giving sense to unfinalized stories, antenar-ratives and future scenarios (see Boje 2011), includ-ing attention to issues, such as temporal depth, timeurgency and temporal orientation in promoting theneed for short or long-term strategies (see Jabri 2016,p. 97; Kunischet al. 2017, p. 1043)

      Future research direction: Temporal depth // Tempo

      See: Bluedorn 2002

    6. Second, howtime is variously used in past constructions that givesense to what has occurred, in for example, nostal-gic tales that seek to sustain identity-relevant valuesand beliefs, or using time to leverage reformulationsin repositioning these tales, for example, with theaim of undermining nostalgia as a platform for resis-tance (see Brown and Humphreys 2002; Strangleman1999).

      Future research direction: Importance of reflexivity // Effects of Time Perspectives on sensemaking

      See: Zimbardo & Boyd's Time Perspectives

    7. First, exam-ination of time representations in the more finalizedand structured stories in organizations (see Gabriel2000): for example, how time and temporality areused to convey a particular message, moral lesson orpresent a causal explanation that is both compellingand plausible.

      Future research direction: Language of time

      See: Zerubavel and semiotics

    8. Our discussion commences with a fourfold charac-terization of underlying temporal modalities fromwhich we extend six pathways in mapping out fu-ture research opportunities.

      1) "finalized retrospective stories’ that seek to reconstruct from the past, key events, characters and plots that provide causal explanations for making sense of current disruptions and ambiguities (these stories take on the Aristotelean convention of being characterized by a beginning, middle and end)"

      2) "‘unfinalized prospective stories’ that are forward looking: time is no longer set, but non-linear and indeterminate. These stories of the future are unfinalized (like Boje’s concept of antenarrative), subjective and open to re-storying in seeking to make sense of ongoing and newly emerging occurrences as well as the uncertainties, threats and opportunities of a future that has yet to be."

      3) "‘present continuity-based stories’ that attempt to provide some reassurances about sustaining relations and values: to reassert a collective sense of belonging, sense of stability and membership, as in the heightened sense of belongingness through nostalgia (Strangleman 1999) that enables a sense of continuity between what is happening, what happened in the past and what may happen in the future."

      4) "‘present change-based stories’ often comprising a mixture of optimism in promoting the benefits of changing for the future, and pessimism in constructing stories on the potential threats and negative implications of future change (aligning with Ybema’s (2004) notion of postalgia)."

    9. Boudes and Laroche (2009) attend to narra-tive sensemaking in post-crisis inquiry reports inanalysing the foreseeability of the deaths that oc-curred following the heat wave in France in 2003.They identify a tendency towards simplification andreductionism, but suggest that, rather than represent-ing a linear temporal sequence in which recommen-dations follow explanation, ‘the story is built at leastpartially around preferred lessons and the desiredrecommendations for action’ (Boudes and Laroche2009, p. 392).

      Read this paper.

      The paper focuses on post-crisis sensemaking. Do they discuss sensemaking in the moment?

    10. This returns us to Weick’s (2012) claimthat the unfinalized uncertainties of life experiences ismade sense of and temporally fixed in narrative ratio-nality, but with the added notion that these temporalconstructions build on prospective ideas (a non-lineartemporality in story construction, but not in the struc-ture of the final narrative).

      This seems to fit with the Cunliffe and Coupland paper that in the moment actions are non-linear but the narrative is plotted across time (linear).

    11. As the authors note: ‘Sensemaking is tempo-ral in at least two ways: in the moment of performancewe draw on past experiences, present interactions andfuture anticipations, and second, we plot narrative co-herence across time’ (Cunliffe and Coupland 2012,p. 83).

      This is a helpful frame for thinking about how SBTF volunteers are simultaneously trying to evaluate granular bits of information and add it to a larger emerging story about the event.

      This paper also cites Goffman's Presentation of Self

    12. However, in their study focusing on theimportance of time to sensemaking in crisis situa-tions, Combe and Carrington (2015) point out thatmost studies still remain focused on objective clocktime with little attempt to examine the influence ofthe subjective experience of the past or how leadersimagine the future may affect how they interpret andmake sense of the present

      studies of time and sensemaking in a crisis.

    13. Al-though both scholars usefully illustrate the powerof narratives to make and give sense to experiencesin organizations, Gabriel (2000) adopts a folkloristposition with a reliance on conventional temporal-ity and sequenced event time, in which causality isbuilt into the narrative construction with a progres-sive temporality (beginning, middle and end). In con-trast, Boje (2011) is interested in the more fragmentedand terse stories and the ways in which these un-resolved narratives open up possibilities for poten-tial futures (prospective sensemaking).

      Contrast of Gabriel and Boje's approaches in a nutshell.

    14. As Bojeet al. (2016a, p. 395)indicate, through situating antenarratives in subjec-tive time, they are able to show ‘how diverse voicesinterconnect, embed and entangle in organizationalstrategies’.

      Need to unpack this a bit. Is this how to scaffold the SBTF situated time instances into a sensemaking process?

      Subjective time (per the philosopher's term) is referred to as socially-constructed time (by the sociologists).

      In Brunelle (2017):

      *"temporal construals

      The way organizational members interpret or situate themselves in time and embrace time-related concepts such as of time scarcity, urgency, orientation. ‘temporal construals inform and are informed by intersubjective, subjective and objective times.’ (R. A. Roe et al., 2009)"*

    15. Boje seeks to elevate the place ofstories in organization studies in examining the inter-play between the control of narrative (order) and theunfinalized nature of emergent story (disorder)

      How does this manifest (if at all) in crisis social media?

      What is represented by the order? What is represented by the disorder?

      If crisis social media is performative storytelling, then what does Goffman say about sensemaking?

    16. For Boje (2008,p. 1) narrative has served to present reality in an or-dered fashion (the arrow of time), whereas storiesare at times able to break out of this narrative orderand offer a more diverse, fragmented and muddledview of reality (non-linear temporality). He refers toa storytelling organization as a ‘collective storytellingsystem in which the performance of stories is a keypart of members’ sensemaking and a means to allowthem to supplement individual memories with insti-tutional memory’ (Boje 1991, p. 106).

      Narrative is linear (arrow of time) Story "in the here and now" is non-linear

    17. From Boje’s perspective, coherent narrativesbuilt on retrospective sensemaking serve to controland regulate, while living stories in the present (asin simultaneous storytelling) disperse and challenge,providing alternative interpretations, with antenarra-tives offering future possibilities through prospectivesensemaking

      Boje's approach.

    18. From thisfolklorist perspective, sequenced event time predom-inates, and conventional temporality is not called intoquestion, and yet there remain subtle and differentconceptions of time, sometimes continuous, some-times discontinuous, sometimes linear and sometimestimeless, that extend beyond a simple characterizationof Newtonian linear-time.

      Different types of time are incorporated into stories but the through-line remains linear.

    19. Coherent, finalized stories are embedded with alinear structure that aligns with clock time and theGregorian calendar (Gabriel 2000, p. 239). Chronol-ogy and objective time implant these stories withan identifiable past, present and future and a linearcausality that provides a temporal structure (a be-ginning, middle and end with plot and characters).This linearity is tied to the inviolability of sequencedevents that occur within a tensed notion of time where,for example, you cannot have a character seeking re-venge before an original insult has occurred, nor canyou have a punishment for a crime that will be com-mitted later.

      For Gabriel, stories have a linear temporal structure (beginning, middle, end) driven by past, present and future events.

    20. For Gabriel, stories are a subset of narratives (whileall stories are narratives, not all narratives are stories),arguing that theories, statistics, reports or documentsthat describe events and seek to present objective factsshould not be treated as stories (nor for that mattershould clich ́es), as stories interpret events often dis-torting, omitting and embellishing to engage audienceemotions, they generate, sustain, destroy and under-mine meaning, and while they are crafted along par-ticular lines they do not obliterate the facts (Gabriel2000, pp. 3–4).

      Story definition per Gabriel.

      SBTF data collection/sensemaking would not be a story, per Gabriel's definition.

      But is it sensemaking?

    21. A key comparative difference centreson their definition and approach to stories. Gabrielis concerned with completed coherent stories with abeginning, middle and end, whereas Boje examinesunfinalized stories and future-oriented sensemaking.Temporality is central to both and yet, as we willillustrate, concepts of time remain implicit and inad-equately theorized.

      Differences between Gabriel's approach and Boje.

    22. Thissupported the common claim that, in organizationalresearch, time usually remains hidden or implicit andis seldom discussed explicitly (Roeet al. 2009).

      Similar to Nowotny's argument that theory doesn't break through in empirical work.

    23. From these readings, a com-mon and persistent claim centred on the general ab-sence of conceptual thinking about time and tempo-rality (Berends and Antonacopoulou 2014; Dawsonand Sykes 2016)

      Argues that there is a research gap about conceptual thinking about time and storytelling in the organizational studies literature.

      More broadly in other disciplines, Nowotny counters that there is plenty of time/temporal theory but a lack of empirical work that engages it.

    24. This dominant linear view of temporality drawnfrom conventional representations of clock time (dig-itally embedded in a range of everyday devices) hasbeen widely criticized (Adam 1990, 2004; Glennieand Thrift 1996; Thrift 2004; Wajcman 2015), witha growing recognition of the need to bring differen-tiated concepts of time to the fore (see Christens-sonet al. 2014). There is a small but expandingcall to move beyond objective time (Allmanet al.2014) and time-free research (Hassard 1990b, p. 1)or timeless knowledge (Roeet al. 2009) to a moreconceptually informed theorization in which conceptsof time are made more explicit and openly discussed(Anconaet al. 2001b; Bluedorn 2002; Dawson andSykes 2016; Goodmanet al. 2001).

      Cites the need for more concrete examples and more direct engagement with time in theory.

      See: Bluedorn 2002 See: Nowotny

    25. This review highlights how conventional explanations in these related fields of studyare underpinned by linear conceptions of temporality (with an associated causality)and how there is growing recognition of fluidity in the way pasts and futures cometogether in temporal sensemaking of an emergent present.

      how is "emergent present" defined? Is there a predictive element based on past experience and future expectations?

      Is "emergent present" a near-future but not quite real-time dimension of time?

    26. ClassicAristotelian narratives with a linear time structure (stories with a beginning, middle andend) are prominent in the storytelling literature, whereas retrospection, in drawing onthe past in making sense of the present, is a temporal modality central to foundationalconcepts of sensemaking. In examining time and temporality in these related fields,the authors show how the conventional temporal sequence of a past, present and futuredominates, with little consideration being given to time as a multiple rather than singularconcept

      Is the process of retrospection present as a multitemporal or pluritemporal dimension in SBTF crowdwork that is attempting to build knowledge (situational awareness)?

    1. The term ‘enactment’ is used to preserve the central point that when people act, they bring events and structures into existence and set them in motion. People who act in organizations often produce structures, constraints, and opportunities that were not there before they took action.
    2. The way to counteract catastrophes, therefore, is to reduce tight coupling and interactive complexity. To do this, it seems important not to blame technology, but rather to look for and exag- gerate all possible human contributions to crises in the hope that we can spot some previously unnoticed contributions where we can exert leverage.

      The primary process- and design implication suggested by enactment is to increase the ways to leverage human action and sensemaking during crises.

    3. Perhaps the most important implication of enactment is that it might serve as the basis for an ideology of crisis prevention and management. By ideology, we mean a ‘relatively coherent set of beliefs that bind people together and explain their worlds in terms of cause-and-effect relations’ (Beyer, 1981, p. 166).

      Definition of ideology of crisis prevention and management. This concept gets at how beliefs influence enactment -- as both a process and product.

    4. Not only does action simplify tasks, it also often slows down the effects of one variable on another.

      Action helps to clarify the crisis through narrowing/focusing cause/effect and interactions. Again, Weick notes a temporal dimension (speed) of actions but doesn't explore it explicitly.

    5. Enactment affects crisis management through several means such as the psychology of control, effects of action on stress levels, speed of interactions, and ideology

      First mention of temporality as "speed of interactions"

    6. As people see more, they are more likely to notice things they can do something about, which confirms the perception of control and also reduces crisis intensity to lower levels by virtue of early intervention in its development

      "Information is Aid" also contributes to the idea that enactment can assert a sense of control.

    7. As forcefulness and ambiguity increase, enactment is more con- sequential, and more of the unfolding crisis is under the direct control of human action. Conversely, as action becomes more tentative and situations become more clearly structured, enactment processes will play a smaller role in crisis development and managment. Enactment, therefore, will have most effect on those portions of a crisis which are loosely coupled.

      Again, another argument for "Information is Aid" as a way to clarify the known situation, provide more complete descriptions of potential action, etc., this ultimately helps to decrease ambiguity.

    8. These possibili- ties are more likely to be seen if we think of large crises as the outcome of smaller scale enactments. When the enactment perspective is applied to crisis situations, several aspects stand out that are normally overlooked. To look for enactment themes in crises, for example, is to listen for verbs of enactment, words like manual control, intervene, cope, probe, alter, design, solve, decouple, try, peek and poke (Perrow, 1984, p. 333), talk, disregard, and improvise. These verbs may signify actions that have the potential to construct or limit later stages in an unfolding crisis

      Curious why temporality is never mentioned as a dynamic of enactment. It's somewhat implied in the idea of acting in the moment or responding after the fact, but sensemaking and social construction is inherently temporal.

    9. The assumptions that top management make about components within the firm often influence enactment in a manner similar to the mechanism of self-hlfdling prophecy. Many of these assumptions can increase or decrease the likelihood that small errors will escalate into major crises. Thus, assumptions are an important source of crisis prevention.

      Beyond the top management examples provided here, could expectations that DHN work is untrustworthy or inaccurate escalate crisis response due to incomplete situational awareness or an assumption it must be produced in a certain way?

    10. Capacity can also affect crisis potential through staffing decisions that affect the diversity of acts that are available. Enactment is labour-intensive, which means understaffing has serious effects.

      Diverse labor force is also a central principle of effective crowdsourcing and collective intelligence.

    11. Capacity and response repertoire affect crisis perception, because people see those events they feel they have the capacity to do something about. As capacities change, so too do perceptions and actions. This relationship is one of the crucial leverage points to improve crisis management.

      This gets at the idea of information as a form of humanitarian aid.

    12. Action in the form of capacity can affect crisis management through perception, distribution of competence and control within a hierarchy, and number and diversity of actors.

      Capacity seems to have an actor/agency quality to it.

    13. When action is irrevocable, public and volitional, the search for explanations becomes less casual because more is at stake. Explanations that are developed retrospec- tively to justify committed actions are often stronger than beliefs developed under other, less involving, conditions. A tenacious justification can produce selective attention, confident action, and self-confirmation. Tenacious justifications prefigure both perception and action, which means they are often self-confirming.

      Enactment becomes visible when retrosepctive sensemaking about the crisis event incorporates commitment/justification for previous actions.

      Commitment is a double-edged sword: It can help construct useful sensemaking or can perpetuate inaccurate assumptions.

      Is there a form of satisficing happening here?

    14. From the standpoint of enactment, initial responses do more than set the tone; they determine the trajectory of the crisis. Since people know what they have done only after they do it, people and their actions rapidly become part of the crisis. That is unavoidable. To become part of the problem means that people enact some of the environment they face. Had they not acted or had they acted differently, they would face a different set of problems, opportunities and constraints.

      crisis trajectory signals a temporal aspect to the event (Reddy's timeline dimension) and to a person's enactment (Reddy's horizon dimension).

    15. Thus, an enacted environment has both a public and a private face. Publicly, it is a construction that is usually visible to observers other than the actor. Privately, it is a map of if-then assertions in which actions are related to out- comes. These assertions serve as expectations about what will happen in the future.

      How does the process of social coordination influence the actions, interpretations, and predictions that are enacted from the map?

    16. At the heart of enactment is the idea that cognition lies in the path of the action. Action precedes cognition and focuses cognition. The sensemaking sequence implied in the phrase, ‘How can I know what I think until I see what I say?’ involves the action of talking, which lays down traces that are examined, so that cognitions can be inferred. These inferred cognitions then become pre- conceptions which partially affect the next episode of talk, which means the next set of traces deposited by talk are affected partially by previous labels and partially by current context. These earlier inferences also affect how the next episode of talk is examined and what is seen.

      Related to the preceding annotation, how does the social coordination process influence enactment?

      Are the volunteers "talking out loud" on Slack as a means of sensemaking to themselves or with others?

    17. An enacted environment is the residuum of changes produced by enactment. The word ‘residuum’ is preferred to the word ‘residue’ because residuum emphasizes that what is left after a process cannot be ignored or left out of account because it has potential significance (Webster‘s Dictionary of Synonyms, 1951, p. 694). The product of enactment is not an accident, an afterthought, or a byproduct. Instead, it is an orderly, material, social construction that is subject to multiple interpreta- tions. Enacted environments contain real objects such as reactors, pipes and valves. The existence of these objects is not questioned, but their significance, meaning, and content is. These objects are inconsequential until they are acted upon and then incorporated retrospectively into events, situations, and explanations.

      Enactment as an environment.

    18. Enactment is the social process by which a ‘material and symbolic record of action’ (Smircich and Stubbart, 1985, p. 726) is laid down. The process occurs in two steps. First, portions of the field of experience are bracketed and singled out for closer attention on the basis of preconceptions. Second, people act within the context of these bracketed elements, under the guidance of preconceptions, and often shape these elements in the direction of preconceptions (Powers, 1973). Thus, action tends to confirm preconceptions.

      Enactment as a process.

    1. Diverse as HROs may seem, we lump them together because they all operate in an unforgiving social and political environment, an environment rich with the potential for error, where the scale of consequences precludes learning through experimentation, and where to avoid failures in the face of shifting sources of vulnerability, complex processes are used to manage complex technology (Rochlin, 1993).

      High Reliability Organization (HRO) definition.

      Examples offered are: nuclear power plants, air traffic control systems, and space shuttles

    2. We will argue that HROs are important because they provide a window on a distinctive set of pro-cesses that foster effectiveness under trying conditions.The processes found in the best HROs provide the cognitive infrastructure that enables simultaneous adaptive learning and reliable performance.

      What are some concrete examples of"cognitive infrastructure", "simultaneous adaptive learning" and "reliable performance"?

    3. We then move to the heart of the analysis and argue that organizing for high reliability in the more effective HROs, is characterized by a preoccupation with failure, reluctance to simplify interpretations, sensitivity to operations, commitment to resilience, and underspecifi ed structuring. These processes reduce the inertial blind spots that allow failures to cumulate and produce catastrophic outcomes.

      Answers some questions from previous annotation but still need some concrete examples.

    1. Theway organizational membersinterpret or situate themselves in time and embrace time-related concepts such as of time scarcity, urgency, orientation. ‘temporal construals inform and are informed by intersubjective, subjective and objective times.’ (R. A. Roe et al., 2009

      Get Roe's paper. This helps to bridge the ideas of "situated time" and "subjective time" -- or socially constructed ways of experiencing, thinking about and perceiving time.

      See: Dawson and Sykes 2018 See: Pöppel 1978 - https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-642-46354-9_23

    1. Another way to use a classification system is to consider if there are other possible values that could be used for a given dimension.

      Future direction: Identify additional sample values and examples in the literature or in situ to expand the options within each dimension.

    2. For researchers looking for new avenues within human computation, a starting point would be to pick two dimensions and list all possible combinations of values.

      Future direction: Apply two different human computation dimensions to imagine a new approach.

    3. These properties formed three of our dimensions: motivation, human skill, and aggregation.

      These dimensions were inductively revealed through a search of the human computation literature.

      They contrast with properties that cut across human computational systems: quality control, process order and task-request cardinality.

    4. A subtle distinction among human computation systems is the order in which these three roles are performed. We consider the computer to be active only when it is playing an active role in solving the problem, as opposed to simply aggregating results or acting as an information channel. Many permutations are possible.

      3 roles in human computation — requester, worker and computer — can be ordered in 4 different ways:

      C > W > R // W > R > C // C > W > R > C // R > W

    5. The classification system we are presenting is based on six of the most salient distinguishing factors. These are summarized in Figure 3.

      Classification dimensions: Motivation, Quality control, Aggregation, Human skill, Process order, Task-Request Cardinality

    6. "... groups of individuals doing things collectively that seem intelligent.” [41]

      Collective intelligence definition.

      Per the authors, "collective intelligence is a superset of social computing and crowdsourcing, because both are defined in terms of social behavior."

      Collective intelligence is differentiated from human computation because the latter doesn't require a group.

      It is differentiated from crowdsourcing because it doesn't require a public crowd and it can happen without an open call.

    7. Data mining can be defined broadly as: “the application of specific algorithms for extracting patterns from data.” [17]

      Data mining definition

      No human is involved in the extraction of data via a computer.

    8. “... applications and services that facilitate collective action and social interaction online with rich exchange of multimedia information and evolution of aggregate knowledge...” [48]

      Social computing definition

      Humans perform a social role while communication is mediated by technology. The interaction between human social role and CMC is key here.

    9. The intersection of crowdsourcing with human computation in Figure 1 represents applications that could reasonably be considered as replacements for either traditional human roles or computer roles.

      Authors provide example of language translation which could be performed by a machine (when speed and cost matter) or via crowdsourcing (when quality matters)

    10. “Crowdsourcing is the act of taking a job traditionally performed by a designated agent (usually an employee) and outsourcing it to an undefined, generally large group of people in the form of an open call.” [24

      Crowdsourcing definition

      Labor process of worker replaced by public.

    11. modern usage was inspired by von Ahn’s 2005 dissertation titled "Human Computation" [64] and the work leading to it. That thesis defines the term as: “...a paradigm for utilizing human processing power to solve problems that computers cannot yet solve.”

      Human computation definition.

      Problem solving by human reasoning and not a computer.

    12. When classifying an artifact, we consider not what it aspires to be, but what it is in its present state.

      Criterion for determining when/if the artifact is a product of human computation.

    13. human computation does not encompass online discussions or creative projects where the initiative and flow of activity are directed primarily by the participants’ inspiration, as opposed to a predetermined plan designed to solve a computational problem.

      What human computation is not.

      The authors cite Wikipedia as not an example of human computation.

      "Wikipedia was designed not to fill the place of a machine but as a collaborative writing project in place of the professional encyclopedia authors of yore."

    14. Human computation is related to, but not synonymous with terms such as collective intelligence, crowdsourcing, and social computing, though all are important to understanding the landscape in which human computation is situated.

    1. Because of both the content that people upload and the behavioral traces that they leavebehind, social network sites have unprecedented quantities of data concerning humaninteraction. This presents unique opportunities and challenges. On one hand, SNSs offera vibrant “living lab” and access to behavioral data at a scale inconceivable to manysocial scientists. On the other, the data that are available present serious research ethicsquestions and introduce new types of biases that must be examined (boyd and Crawford2012)

      The scope and scale of trace data —from settings, public facing fatures, and server-side — presents similar challenges as technological platform changes = new ethics/privacy issues.

    2. For those of us who believe that social network sites are socio-technical systems, in whichsocial and technical factors shape one another, failing to describe the site under studyignores the fact that the technological constraints and affordances of a site will shapeuser practices and that social norms will emerge over time. Not including informationabout what the feature set was at the time of data collection forecloses the possibility ofidentifying patterns that emerge over time and through the accumulated scholarshipacross a range of sites and user samples. Unfortunately, because they have no knowledgeabout how things will continue to evolve and which features will becomeimportant to track, researchers may not be able to identify the salient features to reportand may struggle with devoting scarce publication space to these details, but this doesn’tundermine the importance of conscientious consideration towards describing the artifactbeing analyzed.

      What about documenting technological features/artifacts on a stand-alone website or public repository, like Github to account for page limits?

    3. In order to produce scholarship that will be enduring, the onus is on social mediaresearchers to describe the technological artifact that they are analyzing with as muchcare as survey researchers take in describing the population sampled, and with as muchdetail as ethnographers use when describing their field site. This is not to say thatresearchers must continue to describe technologies as if no one knows what they are—weare beyond the point where researchers must explain how electronic mail or “email” islike or unlike postal mail. But, rather, researchers must clearly describe the socio-technical context of the particular site, service, or application their scholarship isaddressing. In addition to attending to the technology itself, and the interchange betweentechnical and social processes, we believe SNS researchers should make a concertedeffort to include the date of data collection and to describe the site at the moment of datacollection and the relevant practices of its users. These descriptions will enable laterresearchers to synthesize across studies to identify patterns, much in the same wayreporting exact effect sizes allows for future meta-analyses

      Excellent point and important for my SBTF studies.

    4. One key challenge of studying social media is that designers of these tools are innovatingat a very rapid timeframe and often with little advance notice. Given the rapidly changinginfrastructure and the timeframe of academic publishing, the site at the time of datacollection is likely to be very different from its incarnation at the point of publication.

      Challenges of studying SNSs:

      Temporal effects of platform changes.

      Later in the passage, the authors encourage researchers to fully describe the SNS/platform features studied and any potential effects on user behavior, practices, and norms to avoid orphaned research.

    5. Because of howpeople's position within the SNS shapes their experiences of it, activity-centric analysesrequire contextualization and translation, not unlike what social scientists studyingdiffering cultural practices have had to do for decades.

      Challenges of studying SNSs:

      User's position with the social graph shapes experience and interactions.

    6. What oneexperiences on SNSs and the content to which one is exposed differs depending on thestructure of one's network, a user's individual preferences and history, and her activitiesat that moment.

      Challenges of studying SNSs:

      Content varies by network structure, preferences, history and user activity -- but also site technology/upgrades/new features/deprecated features.

    7. By far the most pressing challengefor SNS scholars lies in the rapid pace at which innovations and technical changes areimplemented in this space. For scholarship in this arena to develop, SNS researchersneed to be mindful of the ways in which these sites evolve over time and the effects thismay have on the interpersonal, psychological, and sociological processes they arestudying.

      Challenges of studying SNSs.

      Evolution of site and the way people use it.

    8. What makes “social media” significant as a category is not the technology, butrather the socio-technical dynamics that unfolded as millions of people embraced thetechnology and used it to collaborate, share information, and socialize. Popular genres ofsocial media integrated the public nature of interest-driven CMC with the more intimatedynamics of interpersonal CMC.

      I'm curious why the authors don't mention the UI/UX advancements in SNS that allowed non-technical people to participate online, rather than passively read. Even most blogs in the early 00s were challenging to use, let alone publish on, without some technical savvy.

    9. All SNSs support multiple modes of communication: one-to-many and one-to-one,synchronous and asynchronous, textual and media-based

      This functionality is the make-or-break for collecting user-generated content during humanitarian crises by DHNs.

    10. Many of the weak tie relationships articulatedon SNSs would fade away were it not for the ease with which people can communicate,share, and maintain simple connections. For this reason, this new definition positionssocial network sites first and foremost as a communication platform, while alsohighlighting the importance of sharing content, typically consumed through a stream.

      Evolution of the new definition of social network site emphasizes its use as a communication platform, followed by content sharing.

    11. A social network site is anetworked communication platformin which participants1) haveuniquely identifiable profilesthat consist of user-supplied content, contentprovided by other users, and/or system-level data; 2) canpublicly articulateconnectionsthat can be viewed and traversed by others; and 3) can consume,produce, and/or interact withstreams of user-generated contentprovided by theirconnections on the site.

      Updated social network site definition.

    12. As social network sites have become mainstream, traversing the connections betweenpeople to view profiles is no longer the sole—or, even primary—way of participation.Content is surfaced through streams, and each piece of content is embedded withnumerous links to other content nuggets.

      Streamed content has supplanted the social graph for traversing SNSs.

      Like the API robots, this also contributes to mis/disinformation campaigns that influence on- and offline behavior.

    13. Yet, one significant shift has unfolded: the traversability ofconnections has become more important for machines than users. As APIs make thesocial graph available to broader audiences, algorithms are being designed to traversethe graph and learn about the individual nodes’ relationship to one another.

      For the SNS, crawlers help serve recommended content, ads, search, and drive prediction models.

      Also, very likely contributes to ease of launching mis/disinformation campiagns.

    14. The ability to see—andtraverse—others’ contact lists was innovative and important in several ways. From anadoption perspective, it enabled users to find shared contacts easily, thus lowering thebarriers to initiating contact with other users and enabling users to harness networkeffects more easily. From a social perspective, it allowed people to easily see therelationships between others, to reconnect with old friends and acquaintances, and totravel through the network in a way that enhanced social interactions.

      Value of viewing/traversing connections.

      Early on, this capacity was a critical and defining feature. The default site design is to "display one's articulated network..."

    15. The rise of open APIs and developer platforms meant that these collections of articulatedcontacts became valuable in contexts outside that particular SNS. Engineers andentrepreneurs alike began talking about the “social graph”—the global network oflinkages between all individuals within a system (Fitzpatrick and Recordon2007). Thislanguage emerged at a time when commercial entities began to believe that the socialgraph hadvalue beyond the individual's relationship with a given social networksite.

      Social graph definition.

    16. As SNSs became more popular with a wider range ofindividuals, many individuals’ contact lists became more diverse as these users Friendedpeople representing a range of contexts (family, professional contacts, church members,etc.). This growing diversity has contributed to cases of “context collapse,” whichdescribes the ways in which individuals that we know from different social contexts cometogether in SNSs in potentially uncomfortable ways (Marwick and boyd2011)

      Context collapse definition.

    17. For users, these connections represent what sociologistsrefer to as a person'ssocial network—the collection of social relations of varyingstrengths and importance that a person maintains

      Social network definition.

    18. Earlier communication tools enabled individuals to create a private list ofcontacts (for instance a buddy list on instant messaging), to establish a group of contactsthat were shared by others (such as a listserv membership list), or to publish a list ofrelated links (such as a blogroll), but SNSs extended the practice of creating a publiclyvisible, personally curated list of contacts and made it a mainstream practice.

      Differences between SNS and CMC.

    19. Streams of quotidian,ephemeral content encourage people to participate more in that they provide an initialartifact around which others can engage. Features that support actions associated withstatus updates—the ability to post comments to, share, or register interest in an update—also encourage a stream of activity that is prompted by an update but often takes on a lifeof its own in the central stream. Today's SNSs are more like news aggregators than theyare like profile-based contexts, even if the algorithm for displaying content is quiteobfuscated.

      Essentially, this is the hook to motivate user-generated content.

    20. In boyd and Ellison (2007), we attempted to stabilize the discussion by offeringa definition of social network sites:web-based services that allow individuals to (1) construct a public or semi-publicprofile within a bounded system, (2) articulate a list of other users with whom theyshare a connection, and (3) view and traverse their list of connections and thosemade by others within the system.

      Early definition of social network sites. Later Ellison and boyd redefine SNS per evolving Web 2.0 standards, CMC studies and social norms.

    1. hus it becomes possible to see how ques-tions around data use need to shift from asking what is in the data, to include discussions of how the data is structured, and how this structure codifies value systems and social practices, subject positions and forms of visibility and invisi-bility (and thus forms of surveillance), along with the very ideas of crisis, risk governance and preparedness. Practices around big data produce and perpetuate specific forms of social engagement as well as understandings of the areas affected and the people being served.

      How data structure influences value systems and social practices is a much-needed topic of inquiry.

    2. Big data is not just about knowing more. It could be – and should be – about knowing better or about changing what knowing means. It is an ethico- episteme-ontological- political matter. The ‘needle in the haystack’ metaphor conceals the fact that there is no such thing as one reality that can be revealed. But multiple, lived are made through mediations and human and technological assemblages. Refugees’ realities of intersecting intelligences are shaped by the ethico- episteme-ontological politics of big data.

      Big, sweeping statement that helps frame how big data could be better conceptualized as a complex, socially contextualized, temporal artifact.

    3. Burns (2015) builds on this to investigate how within digital humanitarianism discourses, big data produce and perform subjects ‘in need’ (individuals or com-munities affected by crises) and a humanitarian ‘saviour’ community that, in turn, seeks answers through big data

      I don't understand what Burns is arguing here. Who is he referring to claims that DHN is a "savior" or "the solution" to crisis response?

      "Big data should therefore be be conceptualized as a framing of what can be known about a humanitarian crisis, and how one is able to grasp that knowledge; in short, it is an epistemology. This epistemology privileges knowledges and knowledge- based practices originating in remote geographies and de- emphasizes the connections between multiple knowledges.... Put another way, this configuration obscures the funding, resource, and skills constraints causing imperfect humanitarian response, instead positing volunteered labor as ‘the solution.’ This subjectivity formation carves a space in which digital humanitarians are necessary for effective humanitarian activities." (Burns 2015: 9–10)

    4. Crises are often not a crisis of information. It is often not a lack of data or capacity to analyse it that prevents ‘us’ from pre-venting disasters or responding effectively. Risk management fails because there is a lack of a relational sense of responsibility. But this does not have to be the case. Technologies that are designed to support collaboration, such as what Jasanoff (2007) terms ‘technologies of humility’, can be better explored to find ways of framing data and correlations that elicit a greater sense of relational responsibility and commitment.

      Is it "a lack of relational sense of responsibility" in crisis response (state vs private sector vs public) or is it the wicked problem of power, class, social hierarchies, etc.?

      "... ways of framing data and correlations that elicit a greater sense of responsibility and commitment."

      That could have a temporal component to it to position urgency, timescape, horizon, etc.

    5. In some ways this constitutes the production of ‘liquid resilience’ – a deflection of risk to the individuals and communities affected which moves us from the idea of an all-powerful and knowing state to that of a ‘plethora of partial projects and initiatives that are seeking to harness ICTs in the service of better knowing and governing individuals and populations’ (Ruppert 2012: 118)

      This critique addresses surveillance state concerns about glue-ing datasets together to form a broader understanding of aggregate social behavior without the necessary constraints/warnings about social contexts and discontinuity between data.

      Skimmed the Ruppert paper, sadly doesn't engage with time and topologies.

    6. Indeed, as Chandler (2015: 9) also argues, crowdsourcing of big data does not equate to a democratisation of risk assessment or risk governance:

      Beyond this quote, Chandler (in engaging crisis/disaster scenarios) argues that Big Data may be more appropriately framed as community reflexive knowledge than causal knowledge. That's an interesting idea.

      *"Thus, It would be more useful to see Big Data as reflexive knowledge rather than as causal knowledge. Big Data cannot help explain global warming but it can enable individuals and household to measure their own energy consumption through the datafication of household objects and complex production and supply chains. Big Data thereby datafies or materialises an individual or community’s being in the world. This reflexive approach works to construct a pluralised and multiple world of self-organising and adaptive processes. The imaginary of Big Data is that the producers and consumers of knowledge and of governance would be indistinguishable; where both knowing and governing exist without external mediation, constituting a perfect harmonious and self-adapting system: often called ‘community resilience’. In this discourse, increasingly articulated by governments and policy-makers, knowledge of causal connections is no longer relevant as communities adapt to the real-time appearances of the world, without necessarily understanding them."

      "Rather than engaging in external understandings of causality in the world, Big Data works on changing social behaviour by enabling greater adaptive reflexivity. If, through Big Data, we could detect and manage our own biorhythms and know the effects of poor eating or a lack of exercise, we could monitor our own health and not need costly medical interventions. Equally, if vulnerable and marginal communities could ‘datafy’ their own modes of being and relationships to their environments they would be able to augment their coping capacities and resilience without disasters or crises occurring. In essence, the imaginary of Big Data resolves the essential problem of modernity and modernist epistemologies, the problem of unintended consequences or side-effects caused by unknown causation, through work on the datafication of the self in its relational-embeddedness.42 This is why disasters in current forms of resilience thinking are understood to be ‘transformative’: revealing the unintended consequences of social planning which prevented proper awareness and responsiveness. Disasters themselves become a form of ‘datafication’, revealing the existence of poor modes of self-governance."*

      Downloaded Chandler paper. Cites Meier quite a bit.

    7. ut Burns finds that humanitarian staff often describe the local communities and ‘crowds’ as the ‘eyes, ears and sensors’ of UN staff, which does not index a genuine collaborative relationship. He states: ‘In all these cases, the discourse talks of putting local people “in the driving seat” when in reality the direction of the journey has already been decided’ (Burns 2015: 48). Burns (2015: 42) also notes that this leads to a transformation of social responsibility into individual responsibility.Neoliberalism’s promotion of free market norms is therefore much more than the simple ideology of free market economics. It is a specific form of social rule that institutionalises a rationality of competition, enterprise indi-vidualised responsibility. Although the state ‘steps back’ and encourages the free conduct of individuals, this is achieved through active intervention into civil society and the opening up of new areas to the logic of private enter-prise and individual initiative. This is the logic behind the rise of resilience

      Burns criticism of humanitarian response as not truly collaborative and an abdication of the state's responsibility for social welfare to the private sector.

    8. The UNHCR has even called for the refugees themselves to also develop their own data solutions and ideas (see Palmer 2014) as a way to help build their ideologies into the data infrastructures and thus bring their prisms into view. This could create a richer situational awareness and a better ability to understand and deal with unfolding and future crises by supporting resilient communities through giving them the means of data producing and sharing

      Participatory-design and community-centered design could be very helpful in this regard but this argument seems overstated.

      Evokes concerns about "distant suffering" (see: Chouliaraki, 2008): Who gets to share? What community? Refugees are not homogeneous.

    9. Doing so switches the discourse from vulnerability, where there is a need for external protection mobilised from above to come in and rescue the refugees, to one of resilience, where self- sufficiency and autonomy are part of the equation (Meier 2013).

      The dichotomy between state-led response vs community-coordinated response as the only ways to deliver aid seems unnecessarily limited.

      It can be both and other models/new ideas.

      Conflict- and persecution-driven humanitarian needs are often rife with complexity and receive scant attention outside of the humanitarian INGO sector.

    10. Yet, at the same time as power is exercised by both the state and corporations, power is gathering from the bottom up in new ways. In disaster response, a dynamic interplay between publics and experts is captured by the concept of social collective intelligence (Büscher et al. 2014); a disruptive innovative force that is challenging the social, economic, political and organisational practices that shape disaster response.

      Cited paper references social media and DHN work.

    11. Since the data is already being collected on a regular basis by ubiquitous private firms, it is thought to contain information that will increase opportunities for intelligence gathering and thereby security. This marks a shift from surveillance to ‘dataveillance’ (van Dijck 2014), where the impetus for data processing is no longer motivated by specific purposes or suspicions, but opportunistic discovery of anomalies that can be investigated. For crisis management this could mean benefits such as richer situation awareness, increased capacity for risk assess-ment, anticipation and prediction, as well as more agile response

      Dataveillance definition.

      The supposed benefits for crisis management don't correspond to the earlier criticisms about data quality, loss of contextualization, and predictive analytics accuracy.

      The following paragraph clears up some of the overly optimistic promises. Perhaps this section is simply overstated for rhetorical purposes.

    12. lthough Snowden’s revelations shocked the world and prompted calls for a public debate on issues of privacy and transparency

      I understand the desire to use a topical hook to explain a complex topic but referring to the highly contentious Snowden scandal as a frame seems risky (alienating) and could potentially undermine an important argument about the surveillance state should new revelations be revealed about his motives/credibility.

    13. While seemingly avoiding the traps of exerting top- down power over people the state does not yet have formal control over, and simultaneously providing support for self- determination and choice to empower individuals for self- sufficiency rather than defining them as vulnerable and passive recipients of top- down protection (Meier 2013), tying individual aid to mobile tracking puts refugees in a situation where their security is dependent upon individual choice and the private sector. Apart from disrupting traditional dynamics of responsibility for aid and protection, public–private sharing of intel-ligence brings new forms of dataveillance

      If the goal is to improve rapid/efficient response to those in need, is it necessarily only a dichotomy of top-down institutional action vs private sector/market-driven reaction? Surely, we can do better than this.

      Data/predictive analytics abuses by the private sector are legion.

      How does social construction vs technological determinism fit here? In what ways are the real traumas suffered by crisis-affected people not being taken into account during the response/relief/resiliency phases?

    14. However, with these big data collections, the focus becomes not the individu-al’s behaviour but social and economic insecurities, vulnerabilities and resilience in relation to the movement of such people. The shift acknowledges that what is surveilled is more complex than an individual person’s movements, communica-tions and actions over time.

      The shift from INGO emergency response/logistics to state-sponsored, individualized resilience via the private sector seems profound here.

      There's also a subtle temporal element here of surveilling need and collecting data over time.

      Again, raises serious questions about the use of predictive analytics, data quality/classification, and PII ethics.

    15. Andrejevic and Gates (2014: 190) suggest that ‘the target becomes the hidden patterns in the data, rather than particular individuals or events’. National and local authorities are not seeking to monitor individuals and discipline their behaviour but to see how many people will reach the country and when, so that they can accommodate them, secure borders, and identify long- term social out-looks such as education, civil services, and impacts upon the host community (Pham et al. 2015).

      This seems like a terribly naive conclusion about mass data collection by the state.

      Also:

      "Yet even if capacities to analyse the haystack for needles more adequately were available, there would be questions about the quality of the haystack, and the meaning of analysis. For ‘Big Data is not self-explanatory’ (Bollier 2010: 13, in boyd and Crawford 2012). Neither is big data necessarily good data in terms of quality or relevance (Lesk 2013: 87) or complete data (boyd and Crawford 2012)."

    16. as boyd and Crawford argue, ‘without taking into account the sample of a data set, the size of the data set is meaningless’ (2012: 669). Furthermore, many tech-niques used by the state and corporations in big data analysis are based on probabilistic prediction which, some experts argue, is alien to, and even incom-prehensible for, human reasoning (Heaven 2013). As Mayer-Schönberger stresses, we should be ‘less worried about privacy and more worried about the abuse of probabilistic prediction’ as these processes confront us with ‘profound ethical dilemmas’ (in Heaven 2013: 35).

      Primary problems to resolve regarding the use of "big data" in humanitarian contexts: dataset size/sample, predictive analytics are contrary to human behavior, and ethical abuses of PII.

    17. Second, this tracking and tracing of refugees has become a deeply ambiguous process in a world riven by political conflict, where ‘migration’ increasingly comes to be discussed in co- location with terrorism.

      Data collection process for refugees is underscored as threat surveillance, whether it is intended or not.

    18. Surveillance studies have tracked a shift from discipline to control (Deleuze 1992; Haggerty and Ericson 2000; Lyon 2014) exemplified by the shift from monitoring confined populations (through technologies such as the panopticon) to using new technologies to keep track of mobile populations.

      Design implication for ICT4D and ICT for humanitarian response -- moving beyond controlled environment surveillance to ubiquitous and omnipresent.

    19. As Coyle and Meier (2009) argue, disasters are often seen as crises of information where it is vital to make sure that people know where to find potable water, how to ask for help, where their relatives are, or if their home is at risk; as well as providing emergency response and human-itarian agencies with information about affected populations. Such a quest for information for ‘security’, in turn, provides fertile ground for a quest for technological solutions, such as big data, which open up opportunities for the extended surveillance of everyday life. The assumption is that if only enough information could be gathered and exchanged, preparedness, resilience and control would follow. This is particularly pertinent with regard to mobile pop-ulations (Adey and Kirby 2016)

      The Information is Aid perspective that drives my research agenda.

    20. hird, at this juncture, control is being equated with visibility and visibility with personal security. But how these individuals are made visible matters for both privacy and security, let alone the politics of conflating refugees, migration and terrorism. Indeed, working with specific data framing mechanisms affects how the causes and effects of disasters are identified and what elements and people are considered (Frickel 2008

      A finer point on threat surveillance that stems from how classifications and categories are framed.

      This also gets at post-colonial interpretations of people, places, and events.

      See: Winner, Do Artifacts Have Politics? See: Bowker and Star, Sorting things out: Classification and its consequences. See: Irani, Post-Colonial Computing

    21. First, there is a double dynamic to the generation of data in the refugee crisis.

      Data is used by the state to mobilize resources for protective services (border management and immigration/asylum systems) and data is used to count/track refugees in order to provision assistance.

    22. Datafication refers to the fact that ‘we can now capture and calculate at a much more comprehensive scale the physical and intangible aspects of existence and act on them’ (Mayer- Schönberger and Cukier 2013: 97

      Datafication definition

      It also incorporates metadata as well as information gleaned from typical sources.

    23. There is an uneasy coming together of diverse computational and human intelligences in these intersections, and the ambiguous nature of intelligence – understood, on the one hand, as a capacity for perceiving, learning and under-standing and, on the other, as information obtained for strategic purposes – marks complex relationships between ‘good’ and ‘dark’ aspects of big data, surveil-lance and crisis management.

      The promise and peril of gathering collective intelligence, surveillance, and capturing big data during humanitarian crises.

    1. The goal of this framework is to envision afuture of crowd work that cansupport more complex, creative, and highly valued work. At the highest level, a platformis needed for managing pools of tasksandworkers. Complex tasks must be decomposed into smaller subtasks, each designed with particular needs and characteristics which must be assignedto appropriate groups of workerswho themselves must be properly motivated, selected(e.g., through reputation), and organized (e.g., through hierarchy). Tasks may be structured through multi-stage workflowsin which workers may collaborateeither synchronously or asynchronously. As part of this, AImay guide (and be guided by) crowd workers. Finally, quality assuranceis needed to ensure each worker’s output is of high quality and fits together.

      Proposed framework to address crowdwork management challenges: shared resources, relationships, and crowd labor.

    2. n human computation, people act as computational components and perform the work that AI systemslack the skillstocomplete

      Human computation definition.

    3. A promising approach that addresses some worker output issues examines the way that workers do their work rather than the output itself, using machine learning and/or visualization to predict the quality of a worker’s output from their behavior [119,120]

      This process improvement idea has some interesting design implications for improving temporal qualities of SBTF data: • How is the volunteer thinking about time? • Where does temporality enter into the data collection workflow? • What metadata do they rely on? • What is their temporal sensemaking approach?

    4. Of the research foci, quality control has arguably received the most attention so far. Approaches for quality control largely fall into two camps: up-front task design and post-hoc result analysis. Task design aimsto design tasks that are resistant to low-quality work.

      Quality control processes is definitely a tension for SBTF.

      A better integrated task design and verification process at the end of activations could be more effectively address information quality concerns.

    5. Many tasks worth completing require cooperation –yet crowdsourcing has largely focused on independent work. Distributed teams have always facedchallenges in cultural differences and coordination[60], but crowd collaboration now must createrapport over much shorter timescales(e.g., one hour) and possibly wider culturalor socioeconomic gaps

      In Kittur's example, synchronous collaboration describes a temporal aspect (timescale and tempo of the work) related to how the collaboration is structured or not.

      "Short periods of intense crowd collaboration call for fast teambuilding and may require the automatic assignment of group members to maximize collective intelligence."

    6. Finally, it will be amajor research undertaking to invent and describe the tasks and techniques that succeed with synchronous collaboration

      Could this be a theme of the SBTF time study?

    7. The two core challenges for realtime crowdsourcing will be 1) scaling upto increased demand for realtime workers, and 2) making workers efficient enough to collectively generateresultsahead of time deadlines.

      One aspect of temporality in Kittur's study is related to "realtime" which they describe as the time need to scale up workers and efficiency speed of workers.

      The other temporal aspect is synchronicity of workers.

    8. Volunteer crowdsourcing platforms have evolved their own hierarchies and decision-making processes [104,156], appropriating techniques from other online communities where appropriate [101]. Most paid approaches have workers make hierarchical decisions collectively: for example, task decomposition and integration[75,80],quality oversight of each others’ contributions[78,100], and leader elections to represent collective opinions[83].

      Examples of hierarchical decision-making by both volunteer and paid crowd workers.

    9. Complex tasks have dependencies, changing requirements, and require multiple types of expertise.

      Characteristics of complex crowd work.

      Later, Kittur refers to complex crowd work as those involving "creativity, brainstorming, essay writing, music composition or civic planning."

      Temporality is definitely a work flow issue for SBTF.

      However, "realtime" is the only temporal attribute noted in this study but it seems to relate only to completion speed and present/immediacy of tasks.

    10. n the sections below, we survey and analyze the 12research focithat comprise our model. First, we consider the future of the work processesand how the workis organized and accomplished. Second, we consider the integration of crowd work and computation, including the symbiosis between human cognition, artificial intelligence(AI), and computationally-enabled crowd platforms. Finally, we consider crowd workers and how we can develop jobs, reputation systems, motivations, and incentives that will benefit them.

      Research foci

      Crowd work processes: Workflow, task assignment, hierarchy, realtime crowd work, synchronous collaboration. quality control

      Crowd computation: Crowds guiding AI, AIs guiding crowds, crowdsourcing platforms

      Crowd worker future: Job design, reputation/credentials, motivation/rewards

    11. Unlike traditional organizations in which workers possess job security and managers can closely supervise and appropriately reward or sanction workers, or distributed computing systems in which processors are usually highly reliable, crowd work poses uniquechallenges for both workers and requestersranging fromjob satisfactiontodirection-setting, coordination, and quality control.

      In the literature, quality tends to be used as an attribute of the output (content, HIT, etc.) but could/should it also refer to the crowd worker experience, as Kittur notes: "job satisfaction, direction-setting, coordination, and quality control"?

      How are these factors incorporated into the process and incentive system?

    12. These same requirements exist in distributed computing, in which tasks need to be scheduled so that they can be completed in the correct sequence and in a timely manner, with data being transferred between computing elements appropriately.

      time factors in crowd work include speed, scheduling, and sequencing

    13. However, crowd work can bea double-edged sword,equally capable of enhancing or diminishing the quality of workers’ lives.We maysee echoes of past labor abuses in globally distributed crowd work: extremely low pay for labor,with marketplaces such as Amazon’s Mechanical

      Crowd work offers flexibility to both workers and requesters to overcome labor shortages, need for expertise, and geographic boundaries.

      However, they are very real concerns about exploitation, piecemeal wages, unethical/dubious work, emphasis on speed over quality, and dehumanizing work conditions.

    14. We focus this paper on paid,onlinecrowd work, which we define here as the performance of tasks online by distributed crowd workers who are financially compensated by requesters(individuals, groups, or organizations). In this sense, crowd work is a socio-technical work systemconstituted through a set of relationships that connect organizations, individuals, technologies and work activities

      Kittur's definition of crowd work:

      "...performance of online tasks by crowd workers who are financially compensated by requesters."

    15. A variety of terminology is currently used in regard to crowds, e.g. crowdsourcing, collective intelligence, human computation, serious games,peer production, and citizen science

      Social coordination activities are defined in numerous ways.

    1. There is also a need for mechanisms to support transformations and processesover time, both for scientific data and scientific ideas. These mechanisms should not only help the user visualize but also express time and change.

      This is still true today. Is the problem truly a technical one or an opportunity to re-imagine the human process of representing time as an attribute and time as a function of evolving data?

    2. Compared to paper artifacts such as laboratory notebooks, computer files do not offer a proper structure to manage temporal and evolutive data.

      Don't agree with this statement at all. Blogs are nothing but linear chronological structures.

    3. Paper holds temporal properties which are not yet integrated in computer.

      Also, weirdly overstated. There were plenty of products and meta data even in 2009 that was available to determine provenance and iteration.

    4. Contrary to paper notes, computer files do not display the traces or versions that led to their final state.

      This seems weirdly overstated. How do paper notes maintain versions and traces? Electronic documents contain rich sources of meta data for trace analysis, as well as various options to explicitly demonstrate temporal order and change through formatting.

    5. Blog tools are designed as publishing tools; they do not support iterative thinking the way paper notebooks do.

      This statement seems to be fixed in traditional, old-school blogging (one idea = one post) and doesn't consider other forms that adapt/extend other ways to represent temporality/change/iteration.

      As one example, live-blogging techniques which incorporate rapid updating of new information through chronological mini-posts, manual time-stamping of new material, etc. Also. plug-ins that allow annotation, image uploads, Google Docs with version control, etc.

      Also, WP post/page formatting options with HTML, typography, etc., can augment re-ordering of information to designate change.

    6. As researchers explore different projects, it is difficult to put order in their ideas, their framing changes andtransitions or regrouping occur [figure 1] (time as change). When the projects are over, defined, researchers can refer to them as a whole and situate them in time (time as order).

      I don't understand this section.

    7. At a higher level, with their roadmaps and deadlines, projects also hold a temporal dimension.

      The DHN analog to projects could be the deployment and/or the humanitarian event temporality (slow-onset, rapid-onset and chronic).

    8. This is related to the fact that biology researchers are in a creative process and reflect on their decisions in order to explore new leads or justify their decisions. Paper laboratory notebooks show this temporality ofthoughts.

      The iterative self-reflection process described in biology research seems relatively undeveloped in DHN work. I don't know that I've seen much negotiation/reflection/critical analysis take place between the moment the data is collected by volunteers and the maps/viz/data/after-action reports created after the fact by the Core Team.

      Perhaps that's a missing element that should be more deeply explored in thinking about data having both a time attribute and being in a state of change? Is there a needed intermediate validation step between data cleaning and creating a data analysis product.

    9. We illustrate how the time as change paradigm helps to better capture the dynamic aspects of their data through three types of data temporality: TODO lists, reflective activity (biology research) and project management.

      One idea as an analog to the biologist example for DHN work is: data sheet (3W or other configuration depending on the deployment type), volunteers' sensemaking activity, and coordination work.

    10. Temporal data can thus be described either as data having time attributes, or data needing a dynamic description, acknowledging data temporal dimension - what we call temporality.

      Re-defining temporality seems less helpful here. It's already a confusing and contested concept. No need to further complicate it.

    11. This corresponds to a classical and quite well-established distinction in the history of ideas: time as order, and time as change [Wolff 2004].

      Get this paper.

    12. Time as order considers temporal data as data that can be described by a time attribute, which can improve navigation or organization. Time as change considers temporal data as data that evolve over time.

      The contrast of time as representing either order or change could be a very helpful way to categorize messy, dynamic humanitarian crisis data.

      We need ways to capture data as an event timeline (X happened, then Y which demands response Z) as well acknowledge that X and Y may be in flux in an evolving crisis zone.

    13. Temporal Data and Data Temporality: Time is change, not only ord

      Synthesis:

    1. A related series of studies have sought to unpack the dynamics of collabo-ration and to understand which features of peer productions support the cre-ation of higher quality content. This topic has been studied especially closelyin the case of Wikipedia, where particular organizational attributes, routines,norms, and technical features impact the quality of individual contributionsas well as the final, collaborative product.

      Benkler provides examples of studies that examined quality of content as a function of community norms, participant motives, and newbie abuse by experienced editors.

      Has Wikipedia learned anything from these studies? Have they adopted any recommended strategies for improvement? What are the design implications for addressing these issues.

      More here from INFO 5501 reading responses:

      https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1H0_DTmOspYZ3EwDJGVkBU2RaFeiibr6w?ogsrc=32

    2. A more fruitfulapproach considers variation in peer production success to understand whenand where it works better and worse.

      Benkler's examples of quality studies of large peer groups seems focused on community evaluation of the output rather than what constitutes a high-performing community (process) or a quality values (norms).

      Note: He cover process and norms several paragraphs later.

    3. Just as peer produced goods vary in their nature and form, there is alsoenormous variation between and within projects in terms of the dimensionsalong which quality might be evaluated. In the case of Wikipedia, scholarshave assessed the encyclopedia in terms of factual accuracy, scope of coverage,political bias, expert evaluation, and peer evaluation – often drawing differentconclusions about the quality of Wikipedia or particular articles.

      The quality of Wikipedia articles can vary considerably. Studies point to uneven socioeconomic/cultural/gender/language representation with the ranks of editors.

      The consensus view is that Wikipedia topics are driven by editor interests which results in variations in coverage.

    4. Although this hasconstituted an inconvenient fact in peer production practice, it also reflects animportant opportunity for future research. By focusing only on the projectsthat successfully mobilize contributors, researchers interested inwhenpeerproduction occurs or the reasonswhyit succeeds at producing high qualityoutputs have systematically selected on their dependent variables. An impor-tant direction for peer production research will be to study these failures.

      Failed peer production projects offer potentially interesting insights and should be studied.

    5. Infollowing these three paths, scholars have begun to consider variation withinpeer production projects to understand when and why peer production leadsto different kinds of high quality outputs

      Recent quality studies have explored projects that: • have not attracted sufficiently large communities to wash out bias/inaccuracies, • large communities that have not functioned to create quality information, • different measures/definitions of quality

    6. Both for-profit andnon-profit organizations that have incorporated peer production models havethrived in the networked environment, often overcoming competition frommore traditional, market- and firm-based models.

      But is this a matter of quality or satisficing a need with a free, easily accessible public platform?

    7. Recent work hasbegun to probe more deeply into different dimensions along which qualitycan be conceptualized and measured. This new scholarship has given rise toa more nuanced understanding of the different mechanisms through whichhigh quality resources arise, and founder, in peer production.

      Benkler notes that output "quality" was the focus of early research and has evolved to exploring how it is "conceptualized and measured." Defining and understanding information quality is also connected to my crowdsourcing work.

      However, I'm curious if quality studies also look at the process, in addition to the output.

    8. Peer production successfully elicits contributions from diverse individu-als with diverse motivations – a quality that continues to distinguish it fromsimilar forms of collective intelligence

      Benkler makes a really bold statement here about how peer production differs from collective intelligence. Not sure I buy this argument.

      Brabner on crowdsourcing:

    9. Resolving the tensions between different motivations and incentives presentsa design challenge for peer production systems and other collective intelli-gence platforms. The complex interdependence of motivations, incentive sys-tems, and the social behaviors that distinct system designs elicit has led Krautand Resnick (2012) to call for evidence-based social design and Benkler (2009,2011) for cooperative human system design.

      Benkler cites research where incentives clash re: "material and prosocial rewards". Also, motivations can be temporally-based which demands flexibility in the incentive system as participants' reasons to contribute change and habits/practices/norms become entrenched.

    10. Evidence from this newer body of research shows that motivations are di-versewithincontributors and that different contributors have different mixesof motivations.

      Because motives are diverse and often entangled between intrinsic and extrinsic motives, as well as within/between different groups of participants, designing incentive systems is tricky. Recent research has found that impacts/effects of one type of incentive can't be separated from impacts/effects on other motivational drivers.

    11. The most important insight provided by some of this newer workis that contributors act for different reasons, and that theories based on a sin-gle uniform motivational model are likely to mischaracterize the motivationaldynamics.

      Field and lab experiments have found that motives are not uniform, are complex, vary due to contextual factors, involve social signaling, and have some temporal qualities.

    12. In particular, these neweraccounts have focused on social status, peer effects, prosocial altruism, groupidentification, and related social psychological dimensions of group behavior

      Again, tracking with organizational studies, intrinsic and extrinsic social psychological characteristics have been the focus of more recent work exploring motivations.

      See: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1H0_DTmOspYZ3EwDJGVkBU2RaFeiibr6w?ogsrc=32

    13. hat said, a growing number of stud-ies also suggest that these motives interact with each other in unpredictableways and, as a result, are vulnerable to “crowding out” when the introduc-tion of extrinsic incentives undermines intrinsic motivation

      As in the organizational studies of peer production, motivation studies have been conducted increasingly through ethnographic observational and field studies.

      Benkler notes that the varied rationales and patterns for participating in peer production are not singular, and "interact with each other in unpredictable ways."

      Intrinsic motivations (internal rewards) tend to give way to extrinsic motivations (external rewards or consequence avoidance)

    14. Other foundational research on motivation in peer production by Lernerand Schankerman (2010) and others has explored why organizations, firmsand governments, rather than individual users, choose to participate in opensource software.

      More recent motivational studies have focused on organizations' motives for engaging in FLOSS projects as a means to innovate, build knowledge/learning capacity, diversify sources and collaborate.

    15. Despite their differences in emphasis,scope, and genre, all of these surveys support the claim that motivations inpeer production are diverse and heterogeneous.

      Survey studies are widely used in peer production research.

      Observational/ethnographic have also been used to study participants. Results also reflected that motives were varied but also seem to indicate that participants self-selected their projects, collaborators, and specific production roles.

    16. Frequently cited motivations in foundational work by theseauthors, von Hippel and von Krogh (2003), von Krogh (2003), and others in-cluded: the use value of the software to the contributing developer; the hedo-nic pleasure of building software; the increased human capital, reputation,or employment prospects; and social status within a community of peers.Other early accounts analyzing examples of peer production beyond FLOSSsuggested additional motivations. For example, Kollock (1999) emphasizedreciprocity, reputation, a sense of efficacy, and collective identity as salientsocial psychological drivers of contribution to online communities and fo-rums.

      Per Benkler, social psychology constructs (individual behavior, feelings, and thoughts within a social context) offer better descriptions for understanding peer production motivations than economic theory.

      Cited studies in this passage are from:

      CSCW (Beenen, HICSS (Forte and Bruckman), ACM (Nov) GROUP (Panciera) Psychology (Rafarli and Ariel) Social Psychology (Cheshire) CMC (Cheshire and Antin) Law (Benkler) Open Source (Coleman and Hill) MIS (von Krogh et al)

    17. A second quality of peer production that challenged conventional economictheories of motivation and cooperation was the absence of clear extrinsic in-centives like monetary rewards. Traditional economic explanations of behav-ior rely on the assumption of a fundamentally self-interested actor mobilizedthrough financial or other incentives. In seeking to explain how peer produc-tion projects attract highly skilled contributors without money, much of theliterature on peer production has focused on questions of participant moti-vation.

      Peer production contrasts with other forms of labor in its varied non-monetary/economic incentives. Early research on participant motives was grounded in longstanding economic theory/frameworks about self-interested actors.

      The economic approach makes sense, however. Without prior work in peer production, attempting to apply/extend other labor frameworks would be an appropriate evaluation technique.